The cyclist who was issued a fixed penalty notice for straying off the cycling section of a shared-use pavement wil have his day in court on February 5, 2015 after pleading not guilty to the offence at Bromley Crown Court yesterday, December 17.
In July Kristian Gregory was riding along the New Kent Road when he was stopped by a PCSO who asked him why he was not riding on the cycle path.
Responding that the path was shared use, Gregory was told that he was on the footpath, and despite pointing out that he had to move onto the pedestrian area to avoid a phone box, he was issued with a fixed penalty notice.
The whole incident was recorded on Gregory's helmet camera.
Gregory's protest against the absurdity of the charge was backed by Cllr Mark Williams, transport portfolio-holder for Southwark Council (the London borough where the incident took place), who persuaded the Met to ease off 'over-zealous' enforcement at this spot.
The Cyclists' Defence Fund (CDF) is supporting Gregory after a crowd-funding appeal raised over £2,600 to help fight his case and others like it.
Cycling charity CTC, Sustrans, the London Cycling Campaign and RoadPeace have joined CDF in writing to the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS), urging them to drop this case as not being in the public interest.
The campaign groups says the alleged offence is trivial and there is a lack of legal clarity about where cycling is permitted at this location, due to poor signing.
Gregory contrasts the enthusiasm for prosecuting him with The Met's failure refer to the CPS the driver who admitted hitting 70-year old cyclist Michael Mason in February. Mr Mason subsequently died of his injuries.
He said: “The CPS has decided to proceed to prosecute me for cycling on the footway despite the obvious lack of any public interest in doing so.
"I have been reading about the case of cyclist Michael Mason, killed by a car whose driver admitted she had no reason not to see him, yet this has been judged not worthy of prosecution.
"This makes the CPS decision to push ahead with my prosecution that much harder to understand.”
To support Kristian Gregory's case and others like it you can make a donation at the CDF's crowdfunding page.
22 thoughts on “Cyclist fined for ‘avoiding phone box’ on shared path pleads not guilty”
Go for it and good luck.
Go for it and good luck.
It does take guts to fight
It does take guts to fight the system like this, but good luck.
The system will fight tooth
The system will fight tooth and nail against anyone trying to disagree. That’s why the CPS will *never* drop this and will possibly appeal an acquittal.
Just watched the video. What
Just watched the video. What a jobs worth moron! No way would I have even paid that idiot the time of day. Just ride off.
Send him up north to Manchester, he can have a job ticketing motorists who park in cycle lanes everywhere. Oh…that’s right…..they don’t give a S**t about that!
I think you’ll find that’s
I think you’ll find that’s Bromley Magistrates Court.
What a waste of everyones
What a waste of everyones time. Yes he could have gone back into the lane, but honestly who really cares…
I hope this gets thrown out
I hope this gets thrown out of Court – the CPS are shown up to be the fools that we all know they are.
The comparison to the Michael
The comparison to the Michael Mason case is sickening. It really highlights the Met’s priorities to road safety.
Whatever happened to
Whatever happened to this?
http://www.theguardian.com/environment/bike-blog/2014/jan/20/police-cycling-pavements
Seems pretty clear-cut to me.
Seems pretty clear-cut to me. Yes, there are more important things to worry about, but he was in the wrong.
More in the wrong than a
More in the wrong than a woman who used her car to kill an innocent man? Really?
oldstrath wrote:More in the
Is that aimed at me? Bizarre if so, clearly not.
andyp wrote:Seems pretty
In the same way that someone who rolls slowly to a stop but whose front wheel goes a centimetre over the stop line has run a red light. Technically illegal, but in no way worth doing anything about.
If he’s been barreling along buzzing close past pedestrians then by all means take the cnut to court, in the same way that someone blasting through a red light should also be done. But given the huge pressure on the justice system given the austerity cuts, having this in court is obscene.
Good on him for taking it on.
Good on him for taking it on. Looks like technically he was wrong but the lawmaker that brought in the fixed penalties for pavement cycling always said it should be used with discretion. There was no discretion used here!
More to the point how ghastly is that cycle path!? looks really nasty cycling along with the wall right next to you – so bad that the guy in front passes the oncoming cyclist on the wrong side to avoid it. Plenty of real estate to be shared out so it doesn’t really need to be so narrow as to be unusable (apart from by wandering phone boxes)
‘In the same way that someone
‘In the same way that someone who rolls slowly to a stop but whose front wheel goes a centimetre over the stop line has run a red light. Technically illegal, but in no way worth doing anything about.’
Not worth doing anything about…you and I would both hope. However if someone did want to do something about it, you’d agree that it was ‘technically illegal’?
So the question isn’t ‘is it right or wrong’, it’s ‘is it worth bothering about’. And I’d agree entirely with you on that question – it seems daft to use time and resource to follow this one up – but I don’t make these decisions.
But, in this case there *is* something being done about it, and it *is* illegal.
The clue is in the sign,
The clue is in the sign, ‘Shared’.
I live close to a popular out of town shopping area where there are a number of shared paths, clearly defined by white line and colour, where do pedestrians prefer to walk? Yep, on the ‘green carpet’, often in a line across completely unaware of cyclists. I don’t make an issue of it, just pass with care but still get shouts of ‘where’s your bell’.
seems a bit of a pointless
seems a bit of a pointless argument to me, could he have moved back after the phone box – definitely he had plenty of time to do so had he chosen to. Is there any reason to take him to court – I doubt it is worth the time of effort or cost but that’s life. My main concern about the whole thing was that the pcso made him go and stand blocking the cycle lane to talk to him. What a muppet.
Quote:I don’t make an issue
I’ve had that one a couple of times recently. Has it been stirred up by the Daily Mail? I find that if I use my bell to warn pedestrians of my approach, they often jump out of their skins, so I use a quiet word + lots of patience instead. It’s not always appreciated.
I would rather the legal fund
I would rather the legal fund was used to prosecute the regent street driver, than defend a guy who talked himself into a fixed penalty notice.
Ha! Why didn’t he use the
Ha! Why didn’t he use the phone box to phone a friend?
He should have just ridden off. Bit of a pillock really but no he shouldn’t have been issued an FPN. Just the Met trying to raise some cash.
This is just one reason why I
This is just one reason why I choose to ride on the road rather than a mixed-use path. They’re not fit for purpose, a stupid half-solution to a problem that can only be solved by proper design and investment.
seems to be a policy driven
seems to be a policy driven revenue generator to me – the council person is likely to have been given a target quantity of tickets to issue that day – so until that target is met any sense of discretion goes out the window – the law is not subjective and so I fear he will see it argued in court that he was on the pedestrian side of the path – I wonder however how many pedestrians are ticketed for walking on the cycling side of shared paths – personally I never ever cycle on paths shared or otherwise as at least things are cleared and less ambiguous on the road – but I wish this cyclist luck and agree totally that the sense for humanity has been lost when no prosecution was brought for the Regent St death – a clear indication of the value given to cyclists and a very sad day for that mans family – very very sad indeed…
http://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/family-release-hospital-photograph-of-cyclist-killed-after-regent-street-crash-as-warning-to-motorists-9196427.html